Abstract: Being confronted with increasing and expanding urbanisation and the loss of natural green spaces, our living environment is threatened more and more by the effects of global climate change. Green infrastructure is often thought of as the solution to increase climate resilience and reinforce the quality of the lived environment simultaneously. While the benefits, or ecosystem services, that are generated through green infrastructure have been studied intensively, forces that influence green infrastructure decision-making have been far less subjected to thorough research. In this study a discrete choice experiment was conducted with local decision makers in Flemish municipalities to reveal crucial factors in the decision process applied to green infrastructure projects. Flanders is one of the most densely built regions in Europe, stressing the urgency to understand local spatial decision factors to guarantee green space. 568 decision makers active in the local administration of 235 Flemish municipalities participated in the experiment, set in a hypothetical neighbourhood park. Every choice alternative exists of five attributes: investment cost, maintenance cost, deferred investment, recreational value, and climate impact. We find that barriers hampering Flemish munipalities' GI implementation, differ over size of the municipality: smallers municipalities are more affected by knowledge gaps, while larger municipalities are experiencing prioritization issues. Results from hierarchical Bayes choice models indicate that municipal decisions on green infrastructure are highly – almost solely -cost-driven, rarely consider the full range of benefits, and centre around short-term and immediate arguments. Moreover, interaction models reveal that a municipalities' financial result is a key determinant of its willingness to invest in public greening and consider long term benefits, suggesting that GI is a luxury good. The results expose some of the heuristics in GI decision making and can be used to inform higher authorities on ways to overcome barriers towards informed decision-making and to facilitate GI investment.

Abstract: Environmental effects and natural resources depletion associated with agriculture production affect the agriculture response to climate change. Traditional cross-sectional climate response models ignore this requirement. This research estimates the impact of climate on European agriculture using a continental scale Ricardian analysis. We correct farm income by accounting for resources (energy, fertilisers, pesticides, and water) use intensity and calculate the sustainable value for a sample of 9497 specialized field crop farms. Compared with the traditional Ricardian method, the marginal effects of temperature remain positive (but less positive) in Northern countries, while it leads to less damages in Southern countries when net revenue and farms? sustainable values are used as dependent variables. Accounting for the environmental effects and depletion of natural capital improves the ability of the Ricardian method to estimate agriculture climate response functions in the long run.

Abstract: Integrated ecosystem management is challenging due to many, often conflicting, targets and limited resources to allocate. A valuable and straightforward approach is to integrate an ecosystem services assessment in a cost-effectiveness analysis as method to evaluate and compare the cost-effectiveness of several management scenarios to reach one or more objectives and take into account the potential effects on other ecosystem functions and services. Nevertheless, this method is not commonly used in ecosystem management evaluation but can provide an alternative for the frequently used but often contested cost-benefit analysis (which requires the step of assigning a monetary value to each benefit). The aim of this study is to apply the cost-effectiveness analysis in combination with an ecosystem services assessment on a real case-study (comparing alternative management strategies for estuaries) to derive lessons learned to go from theory to practice. The application of this method for the case-study reveals many remaining challenges such as data availability and knowledge to assess ecosystem effects of management measures. Nevertheless, the analysis demonstrates that this method can be used for making a more integrated evaluation and supporting better-informed management decisions.

Abstract: In spite of global actions, biodiversity is declining at an alarming rate. Despite the need for objectively comparable monetary standards to include biodiversity arguments in policymaking, research on the relationship between species diversity and its valuation from a societal perspective is still scarce. In this paper, a methodological framework for the valuation of natural predators based on their ecological role in the agroecosystem is introduced. The framework integrates a dynamic ecological model simulating interactions between species with an economic model, thereby quantifying the effect of reduced numbers of natural predators on the net farm income. The model attributes an objective monetary value to increased species diversity through the changes in the provisioning of a marketable good. Results indicate that the loss of three predators could decrease net farm income with 88.86 ha− 1 to 2186.5 ha− 1. For the pear production sector in Flanders in 2011, this constitutes to an indirect use value of 0,68 million for one predator and 16.63 million for the presence of three predators. The aim is to provide a justification for the argument for biodiversity conservation, based on the ecological function of species, through the delivery of comparable monetary standards.

Abstract: The Sustainable Value approach integrates the efficiency with regard to environmental, social and economic resources into a monetary indicator. It gained significant popularity as evidenced by diverse applications at the corporate level. However, its introduction as a measure adhering to the strong sustainability paradigm sparked an ardent debate. This study explores its validity as a macroeconomic strong sustainability measure by applying the Sustainable Value approach to the EU-15 countries. Concretely, we assessed environmental, social and economic resources in combination with the GDP for all EU-15 countries from 1995 to 2006 for three benchmark alternatives. The results show that several countries manage to adequately delink resource use from GDP growth. Furthermore, the remarkable difference in outcome between the national and EU-15 benchmark indicates a possible inefficiency of the current allocation of national resource ceilings imposed by the European institutions. Additionally, by using an effects model we argue that the service degree of the economy and governmental expenditures on social protection and research and development are important determinants of overall resource efficiency. Finally, we sketch out three necessary conditions to link the Sustainable Value approach to the strong sustainability paradigm. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Abstract: A major objective of European agricultural policy is to have a sustainable and efficient farming sector that is applying environmentally-friendly production methods. Policy makers aim to combine a strong economic performance and a sustainable use of natural resources. Therefore, it is important to measure and to assess farm sustainability. For a large dataset of Flemish dairy farms, a valuation method that is based on the concept of opportunity costs is used to calculate and analyze differences among the sample farms with respect to the creation of sustainable value. But more important than measuring the creation of sustainable value is to analyze differences in sustainable efficiency. Therefore, sustainable efficiency measures are calculated and differences in sustainable efficiency are explained. Using panel data, an effect model captures the determinants of sustainable efficiency of the studied farms. The empirical model shows that, in general, larger farms have a higher sustainable efficiency. Also farmer's age and dependency on support payments proved to be determining characteristics for observed differences in sustainable efficiency.